Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-01-2005 MinutesMayor Judith Valles CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO CouncilEstherEstrada• 300 N. `D " Street Susan Longville San Bernardino, CA 92418 Gordon McGinnis Website: www: sbci Neil Derry tY• or 8 Chas Kelley Rikke Van Johnson Wendy McCammack MINUTES MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL AND THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO JOINT ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 1, 2005 COUNCIL CHAMBERS SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA This is the time and place set for a joint adjourned regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council and Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino from the joint regular meeting held at 1:30 p.m., Monday, October 17, 2005, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. The City Clerk has caused to be posted the order of the adjournment of said meeting held on Monday, October 17, 2005, and has on file in the Office of the City Clerk an affidavit of said posting together with a copy of said order, which was posted at 3:00 p.m., Tuesday, October 18, 2005, on the City Hall breezeway bulletin board. The joint adjourned regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council and Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino was called to order by Mayor/Chairman Valles at 5:05 p.m., Tuesday, November 1, 2005, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. Roll Call Roll call was taken by City Clerk Clark with the following being present: Mayor/Chairman Valles; Council Members/Commissioners Estrada, Longville, Derry, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack; City Attorney Penman, City Clerk Clark, City Administrator Wilson. Absent: Council Member/Commissioner McGinnis. 11/01/2005 1. Public hearing - adopt the Updated General Plan RES. 2005-362 - Resolution of the City of San Bernardino adopting the Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, certifying the Final Program Environmental Impact Report, adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, certifying the Traffic Impact Analysis, and adopting the Updated General Plan, the University District Specific Plan, and the Arrowhead Springs Specific Plan. Mayor/Chairman Valles opened the hearing. James Funk, Director of Development Services, stated that the update of the General Plan has been a four-year process costing more than $1,500,000 from the City and another $500,000 from Arrowhead Springs and the owners, Campus Crusade for Christ, for detailed studies and development of the Arrowhead Springs Specific Plan. Mr. Funk thanked several people for their participation in the update of the General Plan: the citizens and the business community of the City of San Bernardino for attending the workshops and meetings; Brian James and Dotty Hardinger of The Planning Center; Ali Cayir and Dr. Yunus Rahi of Transtech; Dr. Karnig, Dave DeMauro, Lee Hanson, and Professor James Mulvihill of Cal State University San Bernardino; and Tom Thornburgh of Arrowhead Springs. Mr. Funk stated that the following were instrumental in trying to simplify the goals and policies of the General Plan: City Engineer Mark Lancaster, Senior Civil Engineer Robert Eisenbeisz, and City Administrator Fred Wilson, with special thanks to City Planner Valerie Ross. Mr. Funk also expressed his appreciation to the Mayor, City Council, Planning Commission, City Attorney's Office and the City Clerk's Office. Terri Rahhal, Principal Planner, stated that the General Plan Update is a comprehensive update and refinement of the goals and policies of the City's General Plan. She stated that General Plan policies address land use, development, conservation of natural and cultural resources and provision of public facilities and services throughout the City as well as in the City's sphere of influence. Ms. Rahhal stated that community workshops, outreach to key stakeholders, and consultation with the Mayor and Council very early in the process set the objectives for the General Plan Update and helped determine the vision of the General Plan. Ms. Rahhal stated that new features and improvements proposed within the General Plan Update include establishment of a clear and unified vision for the future of the City, new strategies for revitalization of older neighborhoods and some of the commercial corridors, and policies that encourage efficient and beneficial infill 2 11/01/2005 development, compact and sustainable development, mixed use development and live/work opportunities, and some additional flexibility in development standards as an incentive to reward excellence in design or to accommodate projects that create jobs or provide other benefits to the community. Ms. Rahhal stated that the University District Specific Plan is primarily a design document. She stated that it is a plan for streetscapes, signage, public art and other features to create a theme for the area surrounding Cal State San Bernardino. Ms. Rahhal stated that the intent of the plan is to create a unique identity for the University District that is also linked to design features throughout the rest of the City. She stated that the University District Specific Plan emphasizes the common goals and the mutual benefits of a close relationship between the University and the City of San Bernardino. Ms. Rahhal stated that the Arrowhead Springs Specific Plan is a unique planned development proposed for the area surrounding the historic Arrowhead Springs Hotel and Resort. She stated that most of the site is outside the current City limits and would require annexation to the City. She stated that the specific plan proposes expansion of the existing hotel and resort, including the addition of an 18- hole golf course, the addition of a new hotel and conference center with an office complex, a resort "village" commercial center and 1,350 residential units.. Ms. Rahhal stated that the project site is approximately 1,900 acres in area, 1,400 acres of which shall remain as open space. The 1,400 acre open space area, which exceeds 2 square miles, constitutes 73 percent of the site. This open space will surround the project with an ample green belt, it will provide fuel modification to protect the project site from wildfires, and at the same time will prevent fire hazards from the project from affecting surrounding public lands. It will act as a transition zone between the manmade landscape on the project site and the adjacent forest lands, including preservation of opportunities for wildlife movement. Ms. Rahhal stated that it is the opinion of staff that this land use plan exemplifies the concept of compact development that is encouraged by the General Plan. She stated that confining the development within an envelope of 500 acres on this site allows for efficiency in providing infrastructure and public services to the site. Ms. Rahhal stated that in compliance with the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program, a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was prepared to address the impacts of the Arrowhead Springs Specific Plan on the regional transportation network. The TIA was circulated to affected jurisdictions for comments and no comments were received. She stated that in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the General Plan Update and associated specific plans. She stated that the procedural steps and important dates relative to CEQA compliance were outlined in the staff report to the Planning Commission, which was included in the backup. 3 11/01/2005 Ms. Rahhal stated that the following agencies submitted comments on the Draft EIR: the Morongo Band of Mission Indians, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), Omnitrans, the Center for Biological Diversity, Caltrans, the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), and the State Clearinghouse. She stated that the Final Program EIR contains adequate responses to all comments received for approval and certification as recommended by the Environmental Review Committee on September 29, 2005. Ms. Rahhal stated that a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program was prepared to guide and track implementation of all mitigation measures in the EIR. She stated that despite the proposed mitigation measures, the EIR concludes that implementation of the General Plan and the University District Specific Plan will result in unavoidable significant adverse impacts on air quality, noise levels and cumulative impacts on the State highway system. Ms. Rahhal stated that despite the proposed mitigation measures, the EIR concludes that implementation of the Arrowhead Springs Specific Plan will result in unavoidable significant adverse impacts on air quality, noise levels and cultural resources. She stated that specific Facts, Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations outlining the beneficial effects of the General Plan Update and associated specific plans that outweigh these significant adverse environmental impacts is presented for the Council's adoption. Ms. Rahhal stated that benefits of the General Plan and the University District Specific Plan cited in the Statement of Overriding Considerations include a new unifying vision for the future of the City, new strategies for revitalization of developed areas, and the update of long term plans for public facilities. Benefits of the Arrowhead Springs Specific Plan cited in the Overriding Considerations include enhancement of a significant historic resource, provision of new resort recreational amenities, including the public golf course, a net fiscal surplus to the City of over $3 million annually, and creation of over 2,500 jobs. Ms. Rahhal stated that the Planning Commission considered the General Plan Update and associated plans at a noticed public hearing on October 11, 2005. She stated that the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend the actions as specified in the resolution. Specifically, the Planning Commission recommended that the Mayor and Common Council certify the Final Program Environmental Impact Report; adopt the Facts, Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations; adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan; certify the Traffic Impact Analysis; approve the General Plan Update; approve the University District Specific Plan; and approve the Arrowhead Springs Specific Plan. Furthermore, by adopting the resolution, the Mayor and Common Council would direct staff to file a Notice of Determination and initiate an application to LAFCO for annexation of the Arrowhead Springs property. Brian James of The Planning Center provided an overview of the General Plan, University District Specific Plan and Arrowhead Springs Specific Plan. He stated that since the adoption of the existing General Plan in 1989 some profound changes 4 11/O1/2005 have occurred in the City, most notably, the closure of Norton Air Force Base. Mr. James stated that their job was to make the new document address contemporary issues and the new spirit and vision for the City. He stated that they wanted to build upon the components of the existing General Plan that are viable, streamline the document, provide clear direction and focus on areas of the City that, as they improve or enhance, could have the most impact on the future. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack indicated that as a matter of caution she had to abstain on any area of the General Plan Update that specifically referred to the Highland Avenue Strategic Plan and/or the Uptown Redevelopment Area. The following individuals spoke in support of the General Plan Update: Dr. Albert Karnig, 3284 N. Parkside Drive, San Bernardino, CA, President of California State University San Bernardino; Charles Diamond, Watson & Associates, 1048 Irvine Avenue., Newport Beach, CA; Judi Penman, 221 E. Marshall Blvd., San Bernardino, CA, CEO and President of the Chamber of Commerce; and Warner Hodgdon, 405 Old Arrowhead Road, San Bernardino, CA. The following individuals spoke in opposition of the General Plan Update: Norman Meek, P.O. Box 314, Crestline, CA; and Jane Hunt Ruble, 2305 Second Avenue, Muscoy, CA. Robert Johnson, Attorney representing the Arrowhead Mountain Spring Water Company, 601 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 1500, Los Angeles, CA, stated that his client owns several parcels on the subject property as well as being the owner of certain pipeline easements that crisscross the site. He stated that these parcels are in active use and are part of a multi -million dollar business. Mr. Johnson requested that his letter addressed to James F. Penman, City Attorney, dated November 1, 2005, be entered into the record. He stated that the purpose of his letter was to point out three legal issues as follows: 1) The City did not provide adequate notice of the preparation of the program EIR; 2) Because of significant changes that have been made to the program EIR, the City must recirculate it for public comment; and 3) The General Plan Update and associated Specific Plans EIR will need further environmental clearances in order to proceed with construction. 5 11/01/2005 Tom Thornburgh, developer of Arrowhead Springs, expressed his gratitude to everyone involved with this project. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack requested that annexation of the Arrowhead Springs property take place prior to development, if the resolution is approved. Senior Assistant City Attorney Empeno indicated that he would respond to the first and third issues raised by Mr. Johnson, and Terri Rahhal would respond to the second issue. Mr. Empeno stated that there was no due process violation and that the City did provide legal notices as required by law. He stated that mailed notice was not sent to property owners; however, State law and the City's Development Code do provide that if the number of affected property owners is greater than 1,000, then legal notice can be provided by publication in the newspaper of a 1/80, page ad at least ten days prior to the hearing. Mr. Empeno noted that the Sun newspaper published said ad on October 21. On the issue regarding notice dealing with the reference to the Public Resources Code, Mr. Empeno stated that that was mentioned in the "Recital" section of the resolution. He stated that the notice of intent to prepare an EIR was sent out on November 29, 2004, and on December 14, 2004, the City held a public scoping meeting as required by State law. In response to Mr. Johnson's third comment regarding the relocation of utilities, Mr. Empeflo stated that the program EIR contemplates numerous discretionary decisions that will still have to come before the City for the Arrowhead Springs Project to be completed including parcel maps, tentative maps, conditional use permits and development permits, and with each of these project entitlements there will be a need to provide additional environmental review as required by CEQA. He stated that any public or private utilities that will be identified will have to be addressed in those subsequent discretionary applications and environmental review processes, and if there is a need to relocate them, then those matters will be resolved at that time. Ms. Rahhal responded to the second concern listed in Mr. Johnson's letter that there had been changes to the EIR made subsequent to circulation of the Draft EIR that are significant enough to warrant recirculation of the draft prior to the City taking action. She stated that the letter references Public Resources Code Section 21092 as described in Section 15088.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Ms. Rahhal enumerated some of the criteria described in those sections of the law and explained how they do not apply. She stated that the purpose of this section of the law is to ensure that when new information is made available, the public has the opportunity to comment on it as they did when the draft was first circulated. 6 11/O1/2005 Ms. Rahhal stated that there are several examples of instances that would warrant recirculation because of new information. First, a new significant impact may be identified during the public review period that had not been addressed in the EIR and would have to be handled with new mitigation. Second, through public review of the draft document, it becomes apparent that there would be a substantial increase in the severity of an impact unless additional mitigation is applied. Third, a feasible project alternative as required under CEQA would be identified. A different alternative than what was identified in the document might be identified during the public review period that would substantially lessen the impacts of the project and the proponent of the project or the City would have rejected that alternative. Ms. Rahhal stated that another catchall reason warranting recirculation would be that the Draft EIR itself was fundamentally inadequate thereby depriving the public meaningful input because the analysis was not complete in the first place. Finally, the CEQA Guidelines state that recirculation is not required when new information added to the document merely clarifies, amplifies, or makes insignificant modifications to the Mitigation Measures identified. Ms. Rahhal stated that none of the conditions that require recirculation as defined in CEQA exist relative to the EIR. City Attorney Penman stated that because a question had been raised on October 5 as to whether this project had been delayed, he read the following statement from the Development Services Department into the record: "The City Attorney's Office has not delayed the Arrowhead Springs Project. Since the project's initiation in 2003 and until the review of the documents before you tonight, the only involvement by the City Attorney's Office has been the issue involving the alignment of the new Arrowhead Parkway (aka Harrison Street) a new four lane secondary arterial between 40' and 30' Streets. Among eight alternatives considered in the Fatal Flaw Analysis, the Council, on December 15, 2003, approved alignment for Al; existing Harrison Street, relocated 20 feet to the west and then widened to the west. These alternative alignments of Arrowhead Parkway would have had to be analyzed anyway in any Environmental Impact Report for the Project, regardless of the City Attorney's involvement. Any delay in the project since December 15, 2003, has been due to the unavoidable delay of environmental information arriving late for the Environment Impact Report, which also delayed the General Plan Update." Mr. Penman stated that normally at this point they would have the proponent for American Development Group, Inc. come to the podium and affirm that he would agree to indemnify the City using the standard indemnification language. However, because of the letter that had been received from Mr. Johnson from the law firm of Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal, they negotiated an agreement with Mr. Thornburgh. Mr. Penman requested that this matter be added as an item that arose after the posting of the agenda. 7 11/O1/2005 Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Derry, that the hearing be closed; that full reading of the resolution be waived and said resolution be adopted. Council Member/Commissioner Longville suggested that at the next regular meeting, the Mayor and Common Council come forward with a Request for Proposal to update the Development Code with a special emphasis on the older areas of the City. City Administrator Wilson stated that with the Council's direction, they could just issue the RFP and save the issue from coming back to the Council at the next meeting. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack amended the original motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Derry, that the hearing be closed; that full reading of the resolution be waived and said resolution be adopted; and that the City Administrator be directed to issue a Request for Proposal to update the Development Code. The motion carried and Resolution No. 2005-362 was adopted by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members/Commissioners Estrada, Longville, Derry, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack. Nays: None. Abstentions: Council Member/ Commissioner McCammack (Highland Avenue Strategic Plan and Uptown Redevelopment Project Area ONLY). Absent: Council Member/Commissioner McGinnis. N131. Indemnity and Hold Harmless Agreement between American Development Group, Inc. ("Developer") and the City of San Bernardino Council Member/Commissioner Derry made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Longville, that the matter arose subsequent to the posting of the agenda. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members/ Commissioners Estrada, Longville, Derry, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: Council Member/Commissioner McGinnis. Council Member/Commissioner McCammack made a motion, seconded by Council Member/Commissioner Estrada, that the City enter into the Indemnity and Hold Harmless Agreement with American Development Group, Inc., and that the Mayor be authorized to sign on behalf of the City. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members/ Commissioners Estrada, Longville, Derry, Kelley, Johnson, McCammack. Nays: None. Absent: Council Member/Commissioner McGinnis. 8 11/01/2005 2. Adjournment At 6:47 p.m., the meeting adjourned. The next joint regular meeting of the Mayor and Common Council and the Community Development Commission is scheduled for 1:30 p.m., Monday, November 7, 2005, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, California. No. of Items: 3 No. of Hours: 1.7 RACHEL G. CLARK City Clerk B41 d A J Linda Sutherland Deputy City Clerk 9 11/01/2005